Light - dark, Christ - Antichrist, life - death, free - bond, good - bad.... drunk with wine - filled with the Spirit. They're opposites.
It's interesting the fracture in fundamentalist thought during a discussion that surrounds alcohol or spirits.
Fundamentalists will usually argue the Bible says exactly what it means word for word, without error.
But when it comes to wine, the argument is that it was non-alcoholic, unfermented. But that would not then be wine, as the ancients knew wine to be. It would be juice of the grape, or some other such phraseology to identify non-alcoholic wine.
And if there was no alcoholic spirits as pertains to scripture, there would then be no need of prohibitions to over indulging in alcoholic spirits.
While the word for wine,
Oinos, is mentioned 231 times in the KJV translation of the Greek.
While
Gleukos is sweet wine. Aka/ unfermented wine.
Besides all that, Jesus always spoke in parables. Something the disciples made note of and inquired about.
The wedding feast is no different.
And finally, when this is a Christians forum, I think it interesting the level of temperament that is evoked from some people when they discuss Jesus miracle in the passage of the wedding feast, and as it relates to wine. What is it that causes a Christian to become mocking, incensed, at the mere thought Jesus turned water in Cana into wine? Alcoholic wine?
Especially when all things happen according to God's will and that includes the fact that grapes can be fermented to create alcoholic wine. How is it one would dare imagine Jesus would have turned water into Gleukos and the scripture of the new testament, which was wholly written in Greek, would not reflect that? But instead would refer to Oinos?